Those damn cyclists again!

100200 shih · 19-07-2014 11:49PM

I drive 160 km daily to get to work, Galway - Clifden road.
I leave home every morning at 6.45 am, get into the office early,great no cyclist.

I finish at 5 pm & then I have the joy of been stuck be-hide at least 5 set of people on bikes on any given sunny day. Normally in 2/3/4 having a great chat going about 5/10 km in a 100 km area.
My drive take 1.15 hr each way as the road are all bends ( no cycle lanes ), with some of these road just able to have 2 cars on them .

So when you come across a number of cyclist & you just want to get home and they are having a great chat while there is a pile of people trying to get home, I find this very annoying.

Can people not wait to have there leisure cycles to at least people get home from work.Lots of people have to commute to work so I know that I am not the only one that gets fed up because the 75 min drive can turn into 90 mins because of cyclist. ( That is 15 mins *5 = 1.15 hours less time with my kids a week )

Last Thursday evening, just outside the city I saw ahead a really big women cycling really really slow, not in control of her bike , going to middle of the road to the side of the road in & out of traffic with 1 hand on the bike without looking around her.

I was over taking here & she was on the phone has a great chat with about 20 cars stuck be-hide her.
:mad::mad::mad:

No Pants · 19-07-2014 11:59PM

The insolence of those people! Going for a cycle without even running it by you first to see if it would cause you inconvenience.

robertxxx · 19-07-2014 11:59PM

100200 shih wrote: »

I drive 160 km daily to get to work, Galway - Clifden road.
I leave home every morning at 6.45 am, get into the office early,great no cyclist.

I finish at 5 pm & then I have the joy of been stuck be-hide at least 5 set of people on bikes on any given sunny day. Normally in 2/3/4 having a great chat going about 5/10 km in a 100 km area.
My drive take 1.15 hr each way as the road are all bends ( no cycle lanes ), with some of these road just able to have 2 cars on them .

So when you come across a number of cyclist & you just want to get home and they are having a great chat while there is a pile of people trying to get home, I find this very annoying.

Can people not wait to have there leisure cycles to at least people get home from work.Lots of people have to commute to work so I know that I am not the only one that gets fed up because the 75 min drive can turn into 90 mins because of cyclist. ( That is 15 mins *5 = 1.15 hours less time with my kids a week )

Last Thursday evening, just outside the city I saw ahead a really big women cycling really really slow, not in control of her bike , going to middle of the road to the side of the road in & out of traffic with 1 hand on the bike without looking around her.

I was over taking here & she was on the phone has a great chat with about 20 cars stuck be-hide her.
:mad::mad::mad:

1/ 10 people on bikes.

2/ Makes no sense to point one.

3/ if a bike has peddles then this is a lie.

4/ You either live too close to your job or you cannot drive properly.

100200 shih · 20-07-2014 12:04AM

No Pants wrote: »

The insolence of those people! Going for a cycle without even running it by you first to see if it would cause you inconvenience.[/QUOTE

Now that's a silly statement , I was suggesting that when people are going for there leisure cycles which people are entitle to, that they may let the people get home form work before they slow everyone down,

Tail Docker · 20-07-2014 12:13AM

100200 shih wrote: »

No Pants wrote: »

The insolence of those people! Going for a cycle without even running it by you first to see if it would cause you inconvenience.[/QUOTE

Now that's a silly statement , I was suggesting that when people are going for there leisure cycles which people are entitle to, that they may let the people get home form work before they slow everyone down,

Steady now! No place for common sense like that her. Cyclists have the right to hold up as much traffic as they like. Now, if a farmer on a tractor does it..they have to pull in, as it's an offence, and yup, illegal..

RainyDay · 20-07-2014 12:18AM

100200 shih wrote: »

I drive 160 km daily to get to work, Galway - Clifden road.
I leave home every morning at 6.45 am, get into the office early,great no cyclist.

I finish at 5 pm & then I have the joy of been stuck be-hide at least 5 set of people on bikes on any given sunny day. Normally in 2/3/4 having a great chat going about 5/10 km in a 100 km area.
My drive take 1.15 hr each way as the road are all bends ( no cycle lanes ), with some of these road just able to have 2 cars on them .

So when you come across a number of cyclist & you just want to get home and they are having a great chat while there is a pile of people trying to get home, I find this very annoying.

Can people not wait to have there leisure cycles to at least people get home from work.Lots of people have to commute to work so I know that I am not the only one that gets fed up because the 75 min drive can turn into 90 mins because of cyclist. ( That is 15 mins *5 = 1.15 hours less time with my kids a week )

Last Thursday evening, just outside the city I saw ahead a really big women cycling really really slow, not in control of her bike , going to middle of the road to the side of the road in & out of traffic with 1 hand on the bike without looking around her.

I was over taking here & she was on the phone has a great chat with about 20 cars stuck be-hide her.
:mad::mad::mad:

I find it very annoying when I'm cycling through Dublin on my way to work, and the roads are full of cars crawling along at 5-10 kpmh. I struggle to get past them, usually filtering on the inside, or sometimes passing on the outside. But it really slows down my cycle. It's so rude and inconsiderate of them. Wouldn't you think that they'd travel at different times to me, or just get rid of their cars and get on bikes so that they wouldn't hold me up?

100200 shih · 20-07-2014 12:18AM

robertxxx wrote: »

1/ 10 people on bikes.

2/ Makes no sense to point one.

3/ if a bike has peddles then this is a lie.

4/ You either live too close to your job or you cannot drive properly.

Ill explain it again as you do not seem to understand,

my return trip from work to my home is 160 km or 100 miles per day which take 1.15 hours to drive EACH WAY because its is old country road with lots of bends & no hard shoulders. No by passes here.
I live 80 km from work as I have explain already.

So each day i am delayed by cyclist by 15 min & I work 5 days a week then that = 1.15 hr per week.
The rest of your statements do not make any sense , so I am not going to bother answering them.
I am like everyone else entitle to my opinion.

RainyDay · 20-07-2014 12:20AM

Tail Docker wrote: »

I noticed the Dublin city manager that spannered the Garf Books gig rides a bike.

You seem to be mixing up Owen Keegan and Peter Aiken. The person that spannered the Garth gigs was Peter Aiken, who decided to sell 400k tickets without having a confirmed venue, knowing well that Croker had already done it's 3 gigs for the year, on the assumption that he could bully the authorities into getting his own way.

100200 shih · 20-07-2014 12:21AM

RainyDay wrote: »

I find it very annoying when I'm cycling through Dublin on my way to work, and the roads are full of cars crawling along at 5-10 kpmh. I struggle to get past them, usually filtering on the inside, or sometimes passing on the outside. But it really slows down my cycle. It's so rude and inconsiderate of them. Wouldn't you think that they'd travel at different times to me, or just get rid of their cars and get on bikes so that they wouldn't hold me up?

You have cycle lanes there, what you complaining about ? I do not think you cycle 160 km per day either so you cant really compare cycling a few km around Dublin city with driving around Connemara

100200 shih · 20-07-2014 12:24AM

Tail Docker wrote: »

100200 shih wrote: »

Steady now! No place for common sense like that her. Cyclists have the right to hold up as much traffic as they like. Now, if a farmer on a tractor does it..they have to pull in, as it's an offence, and yup, illegal..

Tractor & buses always pull in when there is a stream of cars be-hide them but cyclist do not,

papu · 20-07-2014 12:28AM

UCDVet wrote: »

I know this won't be popular - but a lot of people who cycle aren't actually helping the environment. (not really directing this at you - just an interesting follow-up).

They compare the CO2 cost of driving their car and compare it to 'zero' - which is nonsense.

The bicycle needs to be powered and people are really inefficient at powering things. The energy needed to move the bicycle comes from the food we eat. Most of us, who aren't vegetarians who only eat locally grown food - goes to the store, buys whatever, and eats it. The environmental impact of eating meat is quite substantial and the extra calories required to power the bicycle aren't magically free.

When you include the cost of food / calories burned - cycling sucks. An electric vehicle can be vastly superior, same with public transport.

http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/5861/is-cycling-worse-for-the-environment-than-driving-to-work-if-you-need-to-take-a

That's still an oversimplification since it's avoiding the manufacturing cost to the environment. If you have a car AND a bicycle and eat a 'normal' diet - sorry pal, you aren't helping the environment by cycling to work. If you skip buying a car because you have a bicycle instead - then yeah - you're doing some good. But if you aren't able to completely ditch the car, you need to go vegetarian (and focus on locally grown food). And you still need to log a LOT of km on the bicycle before you make up for the environmental cost of the manufacturing process / transport process of your bicycle.

I cycle a lot - I'm not trying to discourage anyone from cycling. But I do have some very smug friends who think they are helping the environment, but they aren't. Hell, they'll even go for 2-hour long drives, with their bicycles, so they can spend the weekend riding in some remote location.....and well, I don't want to ruin their fun, but that's all it is. Fun. They aren't doing the environment any favours - but they sure like to act like they are.

Aren't we lucky then that we are a quite obese nation .. You say its about 900kcals for 25km .. That's about 100km per 3600kcals which is about a pound of fat ..

So let's say you're about 10pounds overweight .. That's 1000 kms you have stored up to cycle .. That's allot of commuting ...

You talk about the carbon footprint of manufacturing a bike .. Cop on .. I've a 40 year old bike, I've never bought a new bike they have much longer lifespans than cars do , much easier to fix up and sell on and have a fraction of the manufacturing costs and emission footprint ... You really can't be serious in saying that cycling is as polluting as driving ...

robertxxx · 20-07-2014 12:35AM

Tail Docker wrote: »

100200 shih wrote: »

Steady now! No place for common sense like that her. Cyclists have the right to hold up as much traffic as they like. Now, if a farmer on a tractor does it..they have to pull in, as it's an offence, and yup, illegal..

Thats the law! its a cu*t isnt it:)

robertxxx · 20-07-2014 12:36AM

100200 shih wrote: »

Ill explain it again as you do not seem to understand,

my return trip from work to my home is 160 km or 100 miles per day which take 1.15 hours to drive EACH WAY because its is old country road with lots of bends & no hard shoulders. No by passes here.
I live 80 km from work as I have explain already.

So each day i am delayed by cyclist by 15 min & I work 5 days a week then that = 1.15 hr per week.
The rest of your statements do not make any sense , so I am not going to bother answering them.
I am like everyone else entitle to my opinion.

No need i didnt read the first reply, save your ink!

papu · 20-07-2014 12:41AM

100200 shih wrote: »

Ill explain it again as you do not seem to understand,

my return trip from work to my home is 160 km or 100 miles per day which take 1.15 hours to drive EACH WAY because its is old country road with lots of bends & no hard shoulders. No by passes here.
I live 80 km from work as I have explain already.

So each day i am delayed by cyclist by 15 min & I work 5 days a week then that = 1.15 hr per week.
The rest of your statements do not make any sense , so I am not going to bother answering them.
I am like everyone else entitle to my opinion.

It really isn't any cyclists fault that you chose to live 80km from your place of work ..

Tail Docker · 20-07-2014 12:42AM

robertxxx wrote: »

No need i didnt read the first reply, save your ink!

Good reply. I seldom read your either, but there you go. And no ink is involved in the publication of Boards.

dubscottie · 20-07-2014 01:09AM

robertxxx wrote: »

Tail Docker wrote: »

Thats the law! its a cu*t isnt it:)

Illegal now according to statute.ie… 2011 not the old 1964 act cyclist keep quoting!

article 47 (as amended by Regulation 3 of the Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2011 ( S.I. No. 673 of 2011 )) the following:

“Pedal cyclists

47. (1) A pedal cyclist shall not drive a pedal cycle on a roadway in such a manner as to result in more than 2 pedal cyclists driving abreast, save when overtaking other pedal cyclists, and then only if to do so will not endanger, inconvenience or obstruct other traffic or pedestrians.

(2) Pedal cyclists on a roadway shall cycle in single file when overtaking other traffic.

magicbastarder · 20-07-2014 01:33AM

here's a fact that will blow motorist's minds - the time you are held up by cyclists is far, far, far outweighed by the time you are held up by other motorists.
and in fact, the biggest holdup to those other motorists is - wait for it - motorists like you.
i'm constantly amazed and bemused by people's complaints about being held up by cyclists for a grand total of probably three or four minutes a week, when they spend several hours a week staring at the back of someone else's car, and breathing their exhaust gases.

dubscottie · 20-07-2014 01:43AM

magicbastarder wrote: »

here's a fact that will blow motorist's minds - the time you are held up by cyclists is far, far, far outweighed by the time you are held up by other motorists.
and in fact, the biggest holdup to those other motorists is - wait for it - motorists like you.
i'm constantly amazed and bemused by people's complaints about being held up by cyclists for a grand total of probably three or four minutes a week, when they spend several hours a week staring at the back of someone else's car, and breathing their exhaust gases.

You try getting stuck behind some cyclists whilst climbing a hill. Do they move over… No.. But I have said all this already!

Tail Docker · 20-07-2014 02:02AM

Much as cyclists may proclaim the benefits, have a goo at the stats for cyclists seriously injured on the roads. It has soared with the resurgence of leisure cycling. If you're cycling for improved health, you might have picked a dangerous way to go about it.

magicbastarder · 20-07-2014 02:15AM

source?
the british medical journal concluded about ten years ago that the risk of injury from cycling was outweighed by the health benefits by a factor of ten.
that's not an argument you're going to win.

papu · 20-07-2014 02:18AM

Tail Docker wrote: »

Much as cyclists may proclaim the benefits, have a goo at the stats for cyclists seriously injured on the roads. It has soared with the resurgence of leisure cycling. If you're cycling for improved health, you might have picked a dangerous way to go about it.

That's some good brown youre spouting there ..

http://irishcycle.com/collisions/

magicbastarder · 20-07-2014 02:22AM

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/transportation/bike-sharing-health-risks-benefits

Compared with residents who drive, those using the city’s bike-sharing system experienced an annual increase in 0.03 deaths from traffic accidents and 0.13 deaths from air pollution. However, as a result of increased physical activity, 12.46 deaths were avoided annually, meaning that overall, the program helped prevent 12.28 deaths per year. - See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/transportation/bike-sharing-health-risks-benefits#sthash.mDtDGxI2.dpuf

so cycling increased the number of deaths per year (for the barcelona cycling scheme) by 0.16 for negative effects, but reduced it by 12.46 deaths per year for positive effects; so a benefit of nearly 100 times greater than the drawbacks.

Canis Lupus · 20-07-2014 02:57AM

dubscottie wrote: »

You try getting stuck behind some cyclists whilst climbing a hill. Do they move over… No.. But I have said all this already!

Tell me about it. Everyday my commute is littered with hills with a cyclist going up it that refuses to pull in.

Here, aren't you on a motorbike all the time? Easy overtake on one of them.

DildoFaggins · 20-07-2014 05:19AM

papu wrote: »

It really isn't any cyclists fault that you chose to live 80km from your place of work ..

Because this country is littered with free houses to live beside your workplace?

Jawgap · 20-07-2014 05:47AM

Spook_ie wrote: »

Just a snippet from a debate about motor taxation

Those of you that think cyclists will never be taxed, please don't have nightmares tonight! The technology is there to do it cheaply

No, that quote means they're going to bump up motor tax, rather than set up a whole new taxation system. Easier just to screw us using the existing taxes.

Spook_ie · 20-07-2014 06:45AM

Jawgap wrote: »

No, that quote means they're going to bump up motor tax, rather than set up a whole new taxation system. Easier just to screw us using the existing taxes.

Won't be able to if you've given up the car to commute on a bike, don't have nightmares

BTW How many people thought they'd never tax water?

Jawgap · 20-07-2014 07:02AM

Spook_ie wrote: »

Won't be able to if you've given up the car to commute on a bike, don't have nightmares

BTW How many people thought they'd never tax water?

I haven't given up the car, and I'm not about to either - in fact I'm just about to change it.

As for water, I lived in the UK, US and the Continent at various times - it was only in Ireland I never had to pay for my water, so perhaps less of a shock for me.

On the subject of water charges - here's a question for you. Water charges are expected to bring in about €400 million - if you are the Minister of Finance and you need to raise a significant amount of money - say €2 million - do you

(a) tax bicycles (or cyclists) by setting up a whole new system of a registration and administration; or,

(b) increase water charges by 0.5%

UCDVet · 20-07-2014 08:11AM

magicbastarder wrote: »

here's a fact that will blow motorist's minds - the time you are held up by cyclists is far, far, far outweighed by the time you are held up by other motorists.
and in fact, the biggest holdup to those other motorists is - wait for it - motorists like you.
i'm constantly amazed and bemused by people's complaints about being held up by cyclists for a grand total of probably three or four minutes a week, when they spend several hours a week staring at the back of someone else's car, and breathing their exhaust gases.

That's true - but only because the number of motorists greatly exceeds the number of cyclists. The 'per person' delay for bicycles seems much greater.

suicide_circus · 20-07-2014 08:29AM

UCDVet wrote: »

That's true - but only because the number of motorists greatly exceeds the number of cyclists. The 'per person' delay for bicycles seems much greater.

Seems but probably isnt.

UCDVet · 20-07-2014 08:40AM

magicbastarder wrote: »

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/transportation/bike-sharing-health-risks-benefits

so cycling increased the number of deaths per year (for the barcelona cycling scheme) by 0.16 for negative effects, but reduced it by 12.46 deaths per year for positive effects; so a benefit of nearly 100 times greater than the drawbacks.

If you read a bit more about the study - it seems like they used some questionable methodologies to me.

http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d4521

We assumed that 90% of these users (n=25 426) were new cyclists who had shifted travel mode from cars and that their current Bicing trips replaced the same trips previously made by a car

But they also admit that, based on another UN study - 90% of won't be shifting from cars. They are much more likely to be shifting from public transport and walking.

10% changing from cars, 60% from public transport, and 30% from walking, based on figures in a UN report

.

That doesn't sit right with me at all. All of great sounding conclusions are based off 90% of the users ditching their cars to cycle - but the UN report shows that only 10% are likely to have been car users.

They also don't provide any justification for their environmental impact claims.

We estimated the savings in carbon dioxide emissions following guidelines and emission factors provided by the Catalan Office of Climate Change.26 These values were calibrated to the Barcelona vehicle fleet (number of vehicles using diesel or petrol, and engine efficiency).27

Admittedly, there is a language barrier - but I pulled up the Catalan Office Of Climate Change's calculator. The thing is - I can't find any mention of the word bicycle (bicicleta). I can only assume they calculated the CO2 emissions for the vehicles and assumed zero for the bicycles. It's nonsense, but I have seen the same mistake made in many studies involving bicycles.

Most damning of all is this:

Data on shifts in mode of travel as a result of the Bicing initiative could not be found, but using an alternative scenario with 60% of Bicing users having shifted from public transport, 30% from walking, and 10% from car, had little effect on the number of deaths avoided (10.46 v 12.46) (see web extra table 9).

So they are literally saying - 'Look, we don't have numbers - so we used 90% are switching from cars. And look how great cycling is! - but if we use these other numbers, that are factual, but from another study - well, then there is little effect'. The more realistic numbers, even ignoring my issue with the CO2 stuff - shows no benefit; but they don't use the realistic numbers. They use a totally different number, and give no justification for why. It just makes their study look nicer - so they used it?!

I'd love for someone to explain why I'm wrong and why these reports are spot-on accurate. But sure seems like b.s. to me.

It's also worth mentioning that I'm a cyclist and don't own a car. So I don't 'win' if the study is wrong, I'm not against cycling. It just seems....questionable to me.

Those damn cyclists again!

Comments